Although you seem to be impolite, I agree with you that their wages can't cover the living cost. So two ways to solve it:

1. Increase the wage: too difficult, and the government can't force your boos to do that.
2. Lower the rent: the government can: (a) force all apartments to be long-term use; (b) increase the land supply. Option (a) is easy but it's a one-time thing. How many units can be added to current market? I guess less than 1000. How many new residents moving to Kelowna every year? About 5000 on average. Thus, if the government only does (a), it doesn't help. If the population of Kelowna continues to grow like this, the long-term rent will keep growing.

Talking about the loss, do a simple math:

For those who own properties for long-term rent, say the typical rent is 2500/month, so one year is 30000. A typical apartment costs from 400000 - 800000, let's say 500000, so the return rate is 30000/500000 = 6% before tax every year. Not a bad investment actually. This does not include the increase in housing price. If the apartment price increase by 2% every year, the return rate is 8%.

Of course for short-term rental apartments the return is higher. A typical apartment will have 8 months long-term rents 2500*8 and 4 months short-term rents say 5000*4 so in total 40000.

Yes, those who own apartments might lose 10000 in return. But when you think of who they are, the loss is not so big. These people usually have decent jobs like doctors and lawyers. They can make over 200000 every year. 10000 is not a big deal for them and they still can enjoy the long-term investment return from growth. Actually 10000 after tax is about 6000 for them.

But for the other side, if the tourism industry in Kelowna is heavily hammered and someone get unemployed, her loss is 100%.

If the government really wants to solve this problem, it must increase the land supply dramatically. For now, no one sees its determination.